Nov 12, 2012 10:00am PST
cracking around ronald reagan's feet, the first time he raised taxes. i remember when he said that. >> yes, exactly. well, i think the speaker, i think, is setting the tone, as you saw on the front page, above the fold in "the washington post," you know. call his caucus to task, saying he's got to get the nation's business done. and i think what he said implicitly and probably directly behind the door is, trust me on this. you know, i get it. i understand what we need to do. we're not going to sacrifice our principles and values, but we've got to get the nation's business done. and then when we have a bill kristol coming out and saying, you know, they're all rich guys who live out in hollywood. we can raise their taxes. what an 180-degree turn. >> they're not the small business men. >> you'll probably note this, what an election will do. winning and losing has a consequence. and i think for a lot of republicans right now, given where we were two years ago versus where we are right now, you realize, hey, we're going to have to deal. we're going to have to deal. >> what about the president?
Nov 14, 2012 9:00am PST
. in the last 100 years, only four, right. so eisenhower, fdr, ronald reagan and barack obama. i think the idea that barack obama does not have a historic mandate when 44 men have been president and seven did what he did in two terms, he got 69 million votes the first time, 62 million votes the second time, i think he has a mandate. the things to be done that are great in this election happened to fall on the progressive side, in part because the republican party and conservatism has gone so far right things that used to be centrist, like environmentalism, which was a teddy roosevelt thing which even richard nixon was in favor of. >> john mccain. >> newt gingrich. >> these things have been now reclassed as liberal, right. the victories that the president has a chance to get which are historic, like on climate change, on immigration, are now progressive ideas because they've been left behind. >> it's now almost up to the republican party to grab a piece of that pie to say this is our victory too when in reality if they had done it earlier -- >> let's don't get in debate about the mandate. you ma
Nov 18, 2012 3:00am PST
s, of considers under ronald reagan and george w. bush's tax rates in 2003. it's interesting, i found two universal effects of those tax cuts. first, in every instance we cut the rates, the economy worked faster. it did work, mr. president, we got a lot of growth. but the second may be more interesting, is that guess what happened to the share of taxes paid by the rich. they went up, in fact, if you want to get more money, mr. president, out of rich people, cut their tax rate, don't raise them, because history proves it. >> dave: certainly did in the reagan years and another peace in the wall street journal a couple back, clinton rates, raised top tier 39.6 and as the authors of that piece said produced the one period of shared prosperity not because they raised taxes, but certainly lead to growth, right? >> no question. the 1990's was a prosperous era, but i think that sometimes people get a little of that history wrong what happened in the 1990's, president clinton raised taxes in the first year in office and remember, the first two years in office were a catastrophe and in fa